Jerry Greenfield Quits Ben & Jerry’s After Clash With Unilever
Jerry Greenfield, co-founder of Ben & Jerry’s, has resigned after nearly 50 years, citing a breakdown with parent company Unilever over the brand’s independence on social and political issues. Greenfield argued that the very mission that defined Ben & Jerry’s identity —its outspoken activism —has been “silenced” under corporate control.
In particular, Greenfield pointed to disputes surrounding Ben & Jerry’s stance on Gaza. The brand had previously attempted to halt sales in Israeli-occupied territories, a move that triggered legal battles and global controversy. According to Greenfield, Unilever’s interference in these matters undermined the protections negotiated during the company’s 2000 merger, which guaranteed that its social mission would remain intact.
The History of Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission
Origins of Activist Ice Cream
Founded in 1978, Ben & Jerry’s quickly became known for more than creative flavors. The Vermont-based company built a reputation as a corporate activist, speaking out on climate change, racial equity, fair trade, and global conflicts. Customers expected the brand to be as bold with its values as it was with its ice cream.
The 2000 Unilever Merger
When Ben & Jerry’s was sold to Unilever in 2000, the co-founders insisted on special governance protections. An independent board was created to safeguard the company’s social mission, ensuring that its activist voice would not be lost inside a multinational corporation. Greenfield now argues that those protections have been eroded, leaving the brand’s identity vulnerable.
Unilever’s Response
Unilever has denied Greenfield’s accusations, stating that the company has worked to balance Ben & Jerry’s activist tradition with its obligations to shareholders. A spokesperson emphasized that the brand remains secure under Unilever’s ownership and that dialogue with the social mission board continues. Still, the conflict illustrates the broader challenge of maintaining activism within a global corporate framework.
Jerry Greenfield
What Greenfield’s Exit Means for the Future
Greenfield’s resignation signals a pivotal moment for Ben & Jerry’s. Without one of its original founders at the helm, many wonder whether the company will continue to be a loud voice for social causes or retreat into a more traditional corporate role. Co-founder Ben Cohen has pledged to remain, promising to “fight from the inside,” while Greenfield has vowed to advocate for the brand’s mission from outside the company.
For other mission-driven companies, this serves as a cautionary tale: preserving values in the face of corporate ownership requires more than legal safeguards—it demands constant vigilance and leadership aligned with purpose.
FAQ: Ben & Jerry’s Leadership and Mission
Why did Jerry Greenfield resign?
Greenfield resigned because he felt Unilever had stifled Ben & Jerry’s ability to speak on social and political issues, particularly regarding Gaza.
What protections were included in the Unilever merger?
The 2000 merger established an independent board tasked with protecting Ben & Jerry’s social mission. Greenfield and Cohen argue that those protections have been weakened.
Is Ben Cohen also leaving?
No. Ben Cohen will remain with the company to continue pushing for its activist mission from within.
Could Ben & Jerry’s separate from Unilever?
The founders have explored options to spin off the brand or sell it to mission-aligned investors. However, Unilever has so far rejected such proposals.
Will this affect how customers view the brand?
Yes. Many consumers purchase Ben & Jerry’s products due to its values. The brand risks losing credibility if it pulls back from activism.
Final Thoughts
Jerry Greenfield’s departure is more than a personal decision. It’s a flashpoint in the debate over whether activism and corporate ownership can truly coexist. For Ben & Jerry’s, the coming years will test whether its legacy of social justice can survive under Unilever or whether its mission will need a new path to remain authentic.